I wish they said what factors/costs were represented by those 'preliminary" numbers. I'm saddened that Hanover is the cheapest, but still hopeful that not all of the cost factors have been considered and that the Oxford Square school and NEPA will add some weight, even if it's not monetary.

I have a hard time believing there is that big a difference in their initial projections for the start-up costs for each of the sites. I certainly hope they provide more detail at the workshop this week but I'm not getting my hopes up.

I call BS. They know exactly where they want to put it. No matter the Environmental impact, whatever they are hauling will end up in the deep run stream and into the patapcaco river period.

Its hard to believe, Hanover is the cheapest place to build this business. How can that be? They must be getting something for free. Government makes you think, our children and education are priority, but it sounds like its all about money. We need this school, CSX needs to move on. Or put this trucking business in the back yards of their childrens school.

"Jessup is by far the most expensive because they'd be building their facility in a swamp. The entire site is in their 100-year flood plain..."

Same for Beltsville and it's the second cheapest.

KEEP THE GOODS IN CHINA ,BUY USA

The containers come off the ships in Dundalk and then need to be trucked to a facility to be put on the rail. The closer to the port the cheaper it will be for the facility and total fixed costs. Less miles equals less trips etc. This is major factor to these decision makers, whether they will admit it or not. Line haul costs are usually the major expense with any business within transportation industry. Just because they are now going to wait until the end of 2012 doesn't mean not in Hanover. They are probably figuring out ways to make it happen WOF. (With out fail)

This whole area here the Hanover site is in a 100 year flood plain as well. You can't trust the state, years ago the State bought property on Stoney run road and told the residents that the land would be used as a sound buffer for the Airport and trees would be planted to support wildlife so the whole community pretty much sold out for a song, lets see what's there a car rental return warehouses numerous parking lots. A bread truck refueling point no the state doesn't lie to home owners and it is all about the money.

And Disney land was built in a swamp.

The Montevideo site has no fewer than 220 houses within 1/3 mile of the site including Lennox Park and the houses along Forest Ave. and Montevideo Road. Montevideo Court, a stone's throw from the southern end of the site has 50 houses alone. And Montevideo is the only one of the 3 northern sites where the huge amount of truck traffic will move directly through a resdential area. I suspect the homeowners along Forest Ave. and Montevideo Road will see a constant queue of truck traffic waiting to enter the site. But I agree with other comments that have said that it is all about money, that CSX had already made their decision before spring 2011, the NEPA process is a formality, and that FRA, state of Maryland and CSX are in bed together.

The numbers quoted are near MEANINGLESS. The true purpose behind the numbers quoted is to simply sway public opinion toward the Hanover site, to sway the public to the CSX's side,

The Jessup site is a better choice:
- adjacent to an existing rail yard
- impacts fewer residents (discounting prisioners)
Changing the grade of the site would have to be done regardless of the site chosen. Most of the site at Hanover is 50 feet below grade of the existing rail line...that is ALOT of backfill...unless they intend to leave much of the site in a flood plain.

Rather than bringing everything in from Baltimore's sea terminal by truck, wouldn't it be a better choice to bring everything in from the port SINGLE stacked on rail and simply set the second stack on top at an outside rail yard? I cannot believe CSX hadn't considered this as an option! Then there is NO roadway impact from trucks. Regardless of the site chosen (should be Jessup, not Montevideo or Hanover)

No doubt that Jessup is the better choice. The cost figures do appear to be "fishy". Is there any way that those figures can detailed in an auditable format? Actually, the cost figures would be irrelevant if the NEPA gives the Hanover and Montevideo sites "thumbs down" reviews. Hmmm, much to think about here...

I agree with Johnny Sipes that these numbers seem fishy.

An intermodal yard is a large parking lot with a rail line running through it. Why does that cost a minimum of $140 million?

I certainly hope that when all is said and done that MDOT gets a full audit of the cost to develop this project. I can see a company such as CSX inflating their costs so as to pay as little as possible.

Here is the explanation of how costs are determined, from CSX: "The initial core project estimates we provided are a range of costs based on known site characteristics and considerations, including terminal development; property acquisition; environmental issues; relationships to existing infrastructure, such as local roadways, MARC stations, electric and utility access; and other factors. These preliminary estimates may vary significantly as site-specific conditions are determined and assessed through the NEPA review and project development. As the NEPA process moves forward, determinations will be made on whether additional studies are required for any of the four sites. As we discussed, cost is only part of the equation which will be considered by CSX and MDOT in close cooperation and consultation with the lead federal agency."

I wonder if these projected costs include the estimated $16 million to pave the road to and from the transfer station. In a Baltimore Sun article last week (11/15/2011), Broening Highway (the current road used by trucks going to and from the ports) will be repaved at an estimated $16 million dollars. Broening Highway runs alongside the Seagirt and Dundalk marine terminals and as a result in heavily used by tractor-trailers. The highway is vital to the operations of the Port of Baltimore, and the Maryland Department of Transportation is kicking in $5 million toward the repaving. The road is uneven, full of potholes and has deep ruts in it. According to Jamie Kendrick, deputy director of the Baltimore City Department of Transportation, the new surface of Broening Highway won't be as thick as an airport runway but it will be thicker than the average road to stand up to the truck traffic. Did CSX, MDOT and all the powers that be take this into consideration? They would probably say yes but in all actuallity, they probably haven't.

The State of Maryland knows, look at the recent toll increases. Maryland lawmakers realized the Transportation fund had been pillaged, and needed infusions of money fast. That road you talk of was in great shape when GM was still in Baltimore, it has not been taken care of for quite some time.
I also look for the 295/Hanover road exit to be established in the future. Its in the 20 year plan, but all is too quite now. They just finished 3 lane extension from I-195 past the Beltway on I-295. Its gonna happen, its right next to MDOT on Ridge Road and
will allow another airport exit for traffic relief in the area. These are my opinions.